xxlgeeklord wrote:(non-blocking) okay, I see your point there. I still think it should be a modifier though, but maybe a -1 one. Using another weapon does negate the penalty, but in any other case you have -2 Parry. That's pretty bad.

Yeah, -2 Parry is bad. But the idea is that players design their own weapons, and this is a penalty you can easily work around. If you desperately want weapons that don't count as melee weapons then I'd suggest discussing it with the GM and agreeing on an appropriate benefit to balance it, rather than assigning "Unarmed Defender" an actual ability value. In effect, handle it the same way you would power trappings.

Then in addition you say they don't count as a weapon for the sake of Unarmed Defender - but to compensate, they're so easy to conceal that the Concealable ability also applies when you're wearing them, so you can walk around with them readied.

If you do decide to wear brass knuckles on one hand and hold a knife in the other, you lose the benefit as well as the drawback.

xxlgeeklord wrote:(returning stuff) yes, you could call it a melee weapon with reach, but once you're throwing axes with chains, using bladed boomerangs, or using magically returning kunai, it seems to me you shouldn't be rolling Fighting, shouldn't get wild attacks, shouldn't be limited to throwing it 2" at max, etc.

Perhaps a +1 weapon ability then, allowing it to return to your hand as a normal action - it's mechanically the same as drawing another weapon, but you don't literally have to carry multiple weapons. If you want it to return instantly I'd suggest handling it through Mystic Edge (it's the equivalent of having Quick Draw).

xxlgeeklord wrote:(fixed damage) okay, thanks, this will work fine. I had assumed it would cost more to do this as a fixed bonus increases the chance of acing, allows weak characters to use powerful weapons, and potentially allows for automatic successes. A str+d12 weapon is ridiculous and almost certainly unusable, but a str+d4+4 weapon is ridiculously powerful, as it aces 25% of the time.

The "automatic successes" thing isn't such an issue for damage, as it's versus Toughness+Armour rather than a flat TN 4. However you're right, the fixed bonus is a little better:

d4+4 = average 7.33d6+3 = average 7.2d8+2 = average 7.14d10+1 = average 7.11d12 = average 7.09

It's not enough for me to really worry about (Savage Armoury isn't that precise), but if it bothers you just use my other suggestion - ignore Strength requirments on weapons. In the core rules a longsword is simply better than a shortsword, which is better than a dagger, and this is balanced by the Strength requirement - but in Savage Armoury they should all be equally good, so someone with Strength d8 could choose to be a knife fighter and generally speaking they'd be just as effective as a swordsman.

A third option would be to stick with the lower damage die, but go for a high raise die. I think I'd actually prefer this thematically, as it represents weapons that aren't particularly forceful, but can inflict horrific damage with an accurate blow. This is also what I did for the example katana in SA.

xxlgeeklord wrote:(more armor) I can see how you find the abstract way better, but in my opinion it is inferior. I don't like how even leather armor becomes penalized, making it as good as impossible to have an effective "rogue" character with armor. Also, it means that there are 3 kinds of armor in the world, with no unique and awesome armors for the players to explore and no awesome customization.

Well the armour is balanced against no armour, so you can play a rogue with no armour, or one with leather armour, and they should be equally viable.

Even if I were to put together a set of armour abilities, the penalties wouldn't change; if leather armour didn't give a penalty then everyone would wear it. If you want armour without a penalty, that's what the Armour Proficiency edge is for.

If you really want "wearing armour" to be the standard in your setting, then just reduce the armour penalties by 1. It'll probably mean no more barbarians in loincloths, or wizards wearing only robes, though.

xxlgeeklord wrote:(mounted) here I am forced to disagree. "Mounted Only" means that it cannot be used in dungeons, buildings, caves, big cities, boats, places where you want to be stealthy, and any other place you don't ride your steed. Also, even in mounted combat, a Shaken/Wound to either the steed or the rider forces a Riding roll or the rider is thrown off, at which point the weapon becomes useless. You are also in danger when there is difficult terrain, the steed is panicked, or you are attempting a maneauver with your steed. Any point at which you are not ready for battle your weapon is useless as well, as you are not mounted.

Fair point. I was concerned about people creating separate weapons for mounted combat ("this is my really big sword that I can only wield from horseback"), but that's a good point about the potential for knocking people off their mount. Still, I don't think I would make it a very big modifier - perhaps just -1 for a mounted-only weapon.

I've overhauled the document to introduce a number of changes, as follows:

* Clarified that Strength requirements aren't necessary for weapons created with SA.

* Exotic Weapon Training is now a Seasoned edge.

* Natural Weapons is now a combat edge (rather than a weird edge), and now explicitly replaces Martial Artist. I've clarified a few other points with it, and there's now an Improved Natural Weapons edge as well.

* Dropped "Scope" as a weapon ability, I think it's better to keep it separate.

* Added an "Always Ready" ability for natural weapons, if you don't take this then the natural weapons have to be "readied" like any other weapon. This also means you can recreate the core Martial Artist edge by taking Natural Weapons with Always Ready, Concealable and Low Damage.

* Clarified how the extra damage could be added back to area-effect weapons.

* Added an optional rule for using fixed damage bonuses.

* Added a brief section on creating magic weapons.

* Added a section for two-handed weapons, and described how their bonuses could be extended to one-handed weapons.

* Added a section for "unarmed defender" weapons.

* Added an additional two pages of example weapons.

* Expanded the premade weapons list. There's still a gap on the second page, I need to find something to fill it.

Sorry to quote myself, but this is a follow-up to an earlier comment I made.

Zadmar wrote:There's still a gap on the second page, I need to find something to fill it.

I decided to fill the gap with a list of premade armour types, then move all the gear to the last two pages. I made a few other minor tweaks (clarified using two shields, changed the tanto slightly, etc) but nothing serious. I'm fairly happy with it now, so unless any major problems come up I doubt I'll modify it further (other than fixing typos or pricing mistakes I may have missed).

Although I said I probably wouldn't modify Savage Armoury any further, a few things have come up that I thought would make a great addition, plus there were a couple of areas that I felt needed clarifiation.

* Rephrased Natural Weapons to be less ambiguous, particularly in regard to natural weapons that need to be readied.

* Clarified how entangling weapons work, as they were a bit vague. Also extended it to cover weapons that only entangle (such as nets).

* Fixed a couple of links that weren't working correctly, and adjusted the formating in a few places (mostly due to adding text for the above).

in my system i was playing around with a quick weapon chart for type and size to cover the basics e.g.

type: sword, axes, pick, mual(hammer), flail
size:
short(small version often not made for open warfare)
war(weapons made for the purpose of fighting)
barstard( hand and a half type weapons)
great( claymores and things that are big but still managable)
massive(stupidly big things more for show than practice in some cases)

so 5 types and 5 sizes for 25 basic weapons
trying to use your system to get mine to line up was hard but mainly because i use weight and money very heavily to balance each weapon not just making them 10 100 250 500 or 1000 cost or zero 1 , 2 ,3 encumberance

so i came to a point where each type had +2 points and each size had +2 points for 4 in total but i think it works ok

while this may not be perfect is does allow for normal enc system to be used
and a bit of varity for GM and gamers
you can have this crude hammer that wieghts 12 for 8 coins or this one that is the same but weighs 6 for 14 coins i know ZADs isnt big on money but some of us are

* Cover (Shield), High Penetration and Bludgeoning each double the final Weight.

Thus you could assign the weapons modifiers as follows:

* Longsword (d8) has Weight 8 (same as SWD).

* Dagger (d4, Light+Fragile) has Weight 1 (same as SWD).

* Greatsword (d10, Heavy) has Weight 12 (same as SWD).

* Rapier (d4, Fragile) has Weight 3 (same as SWD).

* Shortsword (d6, Light) has Weight 4 (same as SWD).

* Maul (d8, Heavy+Bludgeoning) has Weight 20 (same as SWD).

* Spear (d6, Fragile) has Weight 5 (same as SWD).

And so on. They won't all be a perfect match, and I'd have some doubts about the pricing for Tough and Fragile with the above change, but the Weight of the weapons should be pretty close to the core rules.

In the end I went for a more abstract way of handling encumbrance, but perhaps I should include an optional section for people who prefer the normal encumbrance rules.

As far as $$$ cost is concerned, you could just treat the listed prices as ranges rather than fixed values. So a Cheap dagger could cost $25 instead of $100, and a normal longsword could cost $300 instead of $250. You could base this on supply and demand and/or the distribution of points towards directly offensive abilities (for example a dagger has 4 points of non-offensive abilities and -2 to its offensive abilities (damage), while the longsword has both of its points added to an offensive ability). But overall this is going to be more of a judgement call than an exact science.

The weapon abilities would still have the usual impact on repair costs, and could also indicate how difficult they are to find and make. So it should be possible to make a Crude staff with a simple Survival roll, but a Cheap dagger would require some sort of Repair or Knowledge (Smithing) roll (and access to basic tools). A longsword would require a more specialised Knowledge (Weaponsmithing) skill and better tools, while a Quality weapon might require expensive materials, high quality tools, a raise on the roll, etc. Forging a Masterwork weapon might even require a specialised Professional Edge; if you want a Hattori Hanzō katana, you'll have to track down Hattori Hanzō and persuade him to make one for you, which could be an adventure in its own right.

Savage Armoury can also be used to replace the “Attack, Melee” and “Attack, Ranged” powers in NE/SPC. Doing so will provide a more flexible and granular attack power, with a more consistent damage output (mainly due to the two dice limit).

Attack (1)Trappings: Claws, magical weapons, breath attack, super martial arts, hi-tech guns.
This power grants you a special form of attack, calculated in exactly the same way as the Natural Weapons edge (or the Magical Heirloom edge if you've also taken the Device modifier). You may take magic only weapon abilities, and may also treat Area-Effect as a +4 weapon ability, if you wish to retain the additional damage on a raise.
Modifiers• Heavy Weapon (+1): The attack counts as a Heavy Weapon.
• Potent Attack (+1/2): Every point assigned to this modifier gives +2 weapon abilities.
• Armor Piercing (+1/2): As per NE/SPC.
• Elemental Trick (+2): As per NE/SPC.
• Focus (+3): As per NE/SPC.
• Knockback (+2): As per NE/SPC.
• Nonlethal (+1): As per NE/SPC.

Related to the issues I discussed here, I think this approach would scale in a more linear way than multiple dice. It also makes it viable to make a minor investment in Attack (with the current rules, it's not really worth having Attack, Ranged with only a few PP, you're better off getting a gun if you're not going to invest heavily).

Attack, Melee gives +d6 damage for 2PP - that's an average of +2.1 damage per PP, compared to the +2 AP per PP. Using the above power, you'd instead get an average of (nearly) +1 damage per PP, making AP much more viable.

Hi! I am trying to use Savage Armoury to build the weapons for my own setting, but one point that struck me is that 2handed weapons get TWOdice steps higher, when chosing the damage 2h-attribute. isnt that a lttle overpowered? that will make them imho much to strong and cheap compared to 1h

I've now updated the PDFs to version 5. This includes optional rules for price ranges and traditional encumbrance, as well as the NE/SPC Attack power described above.

ziegenpeter wrote:Hi! I am trying to use Savage Armoury to build the weapons for my own setting, but one point that struck me is that 2handed weapons get TWOdice steps higher, when chosing the damage 2h-attribute. isnt that a lttle overpowered? that will make them imho much to strong and cheap compared to 1h

As explained on page 8, "The Two-Handed ability costs 1 point, and grants you an ability worth 4 points, for a net gain of 3 points. This is intended to compensate for the lack of a free hand, which might otherwise use a shield (+1 Parry being worth 3 points) or another weapon."

Or to give a real example, using two characters with Strength d10, other traits d8, 3 points of armour, and Savage Armoury weapons:

There were 100000 fights. Greatsword won 49636 of them, while Longsword+Shield won 50364.

Of course the effectiveness of the greatsword varies based on other factors (worse if both fighters are unarmoured, better when using wild attack, etc). But overall they're fairly closely matched.

But I think a lot of explanation is needed.
This weapon list is for a more historically accurate oriented setting, where most of the world my group and I play in is in the late Late Medieval times (double late is intended), around 1450 but there are some areas still a bit backward (where shields and one handed swords are still used...) and even some parts at the dawn of the renaissance (hence your grand greatswords and gunpowder weapons) these newest weapons are still rare and expensive.
I wanted to make swords more expensive than the average weapon to take into account the higher value they had even in historic times. Swords are maybe a bit overpriced but as with all top-technology: if you want those extra x% performance, you have to pay much more than x% of the original price (compare it to cars, computers, sports equipment etc).
I'm not saying they were in every situation the best weapon but the most versatile imho and thus valued by those who could afford them and thus expensive.
The problem was that it was hard to represent that without giving swords to much of an edge(pun inteded) here, so I came to the compromise that all swords are davastating against soft targets and ok vs armoured targets. Axes and blunt weapons are mainly vs armoured targets.
I also took the liberty to change some of Zadmars rules (tut mir leid!):
I wasnt into changing the SW vanilla rules to much so I left out the Raise Die modifications, everything with magic and only used the disadvantage "unwieldy" instead of "carried" since this goes more into how you roleplay things and I dont see "carried" being worth a -2 ability in our group.
This sometimes let me with rather few abilities to chose from so I fiddled with the prices aswell. I also found it little awkward that weapons cost 10/100/250/500/1000 and nothing inbetween.
So maybe you shouldnt see this entirely as "Savage Armoury by Zadmar" but rather as my own attempt to make a compromise between "realism" and "balancing".

Bottomline, my question is: Is there a weapon that strikes you as complety unbalanced or overpowered/-priced or underpowered/-priced?

EDIT:
About the bastard sword: It represents the latest development of the one handed sword which was used with a shield but for harder blows you could grip it with your left hand WHILE wearing a shield (not a big one though). So in my rules you can do this too, but you lose your shield parry bonus the next round for giving up cover.

ziegenpeter wrote:I wanted to make swords more expensive than the average weapon to take into account the higher value they had even in historic times. Swords are maybe a bit overpriced but as with all top-technology: if you want those extra x% performance, you have to pay much more than x% of the original price (compare it to cars, computers, sports equipment etc). I'm not saying they were in every situation the best weapon but the most versatile imho and thus valued by those who could afford them and thus expensive.The problem was that it was hard to represent that without giving swords to much of an edge(pun inteded) here

Well that's pretty much exactly the sort of situation where Expensive (or even Masterwork) could be used.

ziegenpeter wrote:I wasnt into changing the SW vanilla rules to much so I left out the Raise Die modifications, everything with magic and only used the disadvantage "unwieldy" instead of "carried" since this goes more into how you roleplay things and I dont see "carried" being worth a -2 ability in our group.

It's worth noting that the Natural Weapons edge replaces Brawler, Bruiser, Martial Artist, Improved Martial Artist and Martial Arts Master. If you don't allow the raise die to be modified, then it will no longer be possible to simulate the Bruiser edge from the core rules.

Also, if you don't have "Carried", wouldn't that mean your players can sheathe lances and pikes?

ziegenpeter wrote:I also found it little awkward that weapons cost 10/100/250/500/1000 and nothing inbetween.

I covered the same issue a few posts back, and included it in the "price ranges" section on page 14 of the latest PDF. It's also worth stressing a point I made on page 2, which is that "a +3 weapon ability is roughly on par with an Edge" - that's why I don't recommend allowing cash to give more than a +2 weapon ability, otherwise you're effectively allowing players to buy edges with cash.

ziegenpeter wrote:Bottomline, my question is: Is there a weapon that strikes you as complety unbalanced or overpowered/-priced or underpowered/-priced?

They're a bit unbalanced, but not drastically so, although you do seem to have placed a lot of emphasis on the price tag. I'm also curious as to why the two-handed swords give a grapple bonus?

Your longsword would probably be my first choice for a two-handed weapon. Other than that, I'd probably use a flail in my main hand and a parrying dagger in my off hand.

Thank you for taking the time and I am by no means critizising the way you put these rules up.

Zadmar wrote:Well that's pretty much exactly the sort of situation where Expensive (or even Masterwork) could be used.

I did and then I looked at all the prices and than made some little adjustments based on my gutfeeling, the setting, etc

Zadmar wrote:It's worth noting that the Natural Weapons edge replaces Brawler, Bruiser, Martial Artist, Improved Martial Artist and Martial Arts Master. If you don't allow the raise die to be modified, then it will no longer be possible to simulate the Bruiser edge from the core rules.

Sorry I havent paid much attention to your rules, other than the weapon creation rules, yet.

Zadmar wrote:Also, if you don't have "Carried", wouldn't that mean your players can sheathe lances and pikes?

No. Unwieldy in my weapon setting means "unwieldy, long, a little more cumbersome, you have to carry it"

Zadmar wrote:I covered the same issue a few posts back, and included it in the "price ranges" section on page 14 of the latest PDF. It's also worth stressing a point I made on page 2, which is that "a +3 weapon ability is roughly on par with an Edge" - that's why I don't recommend allowing cash to give more than a +2 weapon ability, otherwise you're effectively allowing players to buy edges with cash.

Ok thank you, I missed that. I will have a look at p.14At the beginning my players want be able to have their custom made weapons.

Zadmar wrote:They're a bit unbalanced, but not drastically so, although you do seem to have placed a lot of emphasis on the price tag. I'm also curious as to why the two-handed swords give a grapple bonus?

I am really interested in your opinion, so could you please elaborate on where you find my weapon list unbalanced? Thank you!As to the grapple bonus for 2h swords: Armed Grappling and grappling-like manoeuvers like trapping an opponents sword were an integral part of two handed sword fighting in medieval europe and essential especially for armoured 2HS techniques and of course daggers.See here http://www.thearma.org/essays/armoredlongsword.html

Zadmar wrote:Your longsword would probably be my first choice for a two-handed weapon. Other than that, I'd probably use a flail in my main hand and a parrying dagger in my off hand.

You first sentence is good news! I know this sounds corny, but the Longsword is widely considered the queen of the medieval battlefield.
But for the flail and the parrydagger... damn I'll work on that because in real life(tm), that would be bs and get you killed. Maybe parrydaggers only should work with one handed blade weapons?

By the way: I was thinking about a rule that when you take the scimitar/sabre/flachion or however-curved-blade-version of a sword (not available for doppelhänders), you get -1 vs. armor +1 vs. unarmored or soft armour.
Though with the +1 that I give swords already vs unormoured, that would make sabres the ultimate peasant killers.

Zadmar wrote:They're a bit unbalanced, but not drastically so, although you do seem to have placed a lot of emphasis on the price tag. I'm also curious as to why the two-handed swords give a grapple bonus?

I am really interested in your opinion, so could you please elaborate on where you find my weapon list unbalanced? Thank you!

ziegenpeter wrote:As to the grapple bonus for 2h swords: Armed Grappling and grappling-like manoeuvers like trapping an opponents sword were an integral part of two handed sword fighting in medieval europe and essential especially for armoured 2HS techniques and of course daggers.

But is it actually easier to grapple with a weapon than without one? It might be enough just to allow people to grapple with the sword (normally you need both hands free).

ziegenpeter wrote:I know this sounds corny, but the Longsword is widely considered the queen of the medieval battlefield.

I thought I'd compare it with the warflail, as they seem to be pretty closely matched. Both fighters have d8 across the board:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 46084 of them, while Warflail won 53916.

Both use Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 53337 of them, while Warflail won 46663.

Both have core rules platemail (3 armour) without Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 41733 of them, while Warflail won 58267.

Both have core rules platemail (3 armour) and also use Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 49489 of them, while Warflail won 50511.

Wild Attack is a bit like a nuke button. Once you start using it, your opponent has to use it as well or they'll be brutalised - but the fights become a lot more vicious (and shorter). However it also leaves your defences down, so if you're fighting multiple opponents it's almost always a bad idea. Thus I tend to view it as the favoured choice for one-on-one duels.

So in a one-on-one duel without armour, the longsword has an advantage. With armour, it's very slightly behind. But against multiple opponents, the flail comes out ahead. The flail is more difficult to draw if you're not ready for combat, however, which will make a difference in some situations.

ziegenpeter wrote:But for the flail and the parrydagger... damn I'll work on that because in real life(tm), that would be bs and get you killed. Maybe parrydaggers only should work with one handed blade weapons?

If you have shields, then they'd presumably have a +1 Parry bonus as well, so the end result would be the same:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 39727 of them, while Flail+Shield won 60273.

Both use Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 49858 of them, while Flail+Shield won 50142.

Both have core rules platemail (3 armour) without Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 45155 of them, while Flail+Shield won 54845.

Both have core rules platemail (3 armour) and also use Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 54181 of them, while Flail+Shield won 45819.

Once again, the longsword comes ahead in one-on-one combat, but this time the armoured knight has the advantage.

About hte parry dagger: its very strong I guess. Do you have a suggestion?
Giving shileds +2 parry would make them to strong but how could you implement a parrydagger and giving it a defensive advantage but not as much as shields have? Or I'll just levae it as it is because a shield bash also deals 1d4 dmg and then it would be a flavour-decision...

About grappling with a sword: hmm good point but I guess its easier to grapple with a sword against other weapons, its definetly easier to grapple vs. another sword and against unarmed I'd say ita also easier because you are armed and can use the sword for leverage.

And thanks for your list although the spear has either bastard or reach1 as a result o two-handed if you chose "bastard" you dont get the extra reach

ziegenpeter wrote:About hte parry dagger: its very strong I guess. Do you have a suggestion?Giving shileds +2 parry would make them to strong but how could you implement a parrydagger and giving it a defensive advantage but not as much as shields have? Or I'll just levae it as it is because a shield bash also deals 1d4 dmg and then it would be a flavour-decision...

If you look at the way I handle shields, they only provide +1 Parry (the same as a rapier or parrying dagger) but they also give cover against ranged attacks. This gives them a useful defensive role without making them a must-have for melee combat.

ziegenpeter wrote:About grappling with a sword: hmm good point but I guess its easier to grapple with a sword against other weapons, its definetly easier to grapple vs. another sword and against unarmed I'd say ita also easier because you are armed and can use the sword for leverage.

Against an armed opponent you'd already have the advantage of not counting as an unarmed defender (so you're much less vulnerable to getting hit when you try to grapple someone). The downside of giving a flat bonus is that anyone wanting to create a wrestler will have a strong incentive to use a sword.

ziegenpeter wrote:And thanks for your list although the spear has either bastard or reach1 as a result o two-handed if you chose "bastard" you dont get the extra reach

Right, but both are Two-Handed options. So the breakdown based on SA weapon abilities is:

* Long Range (+3): Can be thrown with a range of 5/10/20.
* Two-Handed (+1): Choose either "Polearm" or "Bastard".
* Cheap (+1): Costs roughly $100 (in this case $80).

When you said the spear "can be thrown as an improvised javelin" I assumed you meant it counted as a javelin when thrown (although I didn't price the AP, so I guess that should be another +½). However if you simply meant it could be thrown in the same way as a javelin, but using the rules for Improvised Weapons (so -1 to attack, and a range of 2/4/8) then I'd price the spear at +2. After all, pretty much any melee weapon can be thrown as an improvised weapon.

Ok I think the cover against ranged attacks is a good point. Althogh imho shileds are a must have in melee combat when you are using 1h weapons and dont have a very good armour. Parrydaggers are more for civil combat and duels, where you are rarely exposed to missile fire, so I guess your rules is fine.

About the wrestling: Well it was more like a flavour-decision although if you want to play a strong wrestler and you are rich enough and from the social that are allowed to carry swords, you might wanna use a sword...

And I'll delete the note about the spear being an improvised javelin, after all, you are right, all weapons can be thrown as improvised weapons.

Is there anything else you would alter in my weapons list?
I think savage Amoury is a nice tool, the only problem I have is that price abilities aswell as things like "carried" are more fluff than crunch and its hard to measure those especially in you beloved combat simulator

These simulations are cool, I am astonished how good the flail is. maybe I should tone it down a bit (d6-1?)

ziegenpeter wrote:I think savage Amoury is a nice tool, the only problem I have is that price abilities aswell as things like "carried" are more fluff than crunch and its hard to measure those especially in you beloved combat simulator

Yeah, in fact I originally left price out entirely, and even now you'll note the price abilities are followed by "(optional)", while the "Money" section on page 3 suggests ignoring it if you don't normally pay much attention to equipment costs. I've expanded the document quite a lot based on feedback.

The Tough, Very Tough, Fragile and Very Fragile were also expanded in the latest version to include more crunch, as I felt Toughness alone didn't seem to come up very often.

The "Carried" ability was intended for weapons that constantly take up a hand. You're right that it's not much of an issue in the middle of a fight, but if you need to use your hands for something else you'll need to put down your weapon first. Want to switch to a bow? You'll have to leave your other weapon lying on the ground, and hope you don't need it if you move. Don't expect to have it on hand if you're in a shop or tavern, either - in fact you may not even be allowed to carry it around on the streets, let alone indoors (assuming you can even get it through the door - imagine someone trying to take their pike into a tavern!).

However there's no reason why you can't scrap certain abilities if you don't like them. You could even divide abilities into primarily fluff and crunch categories, and balance the positive/negative separately for each category.

The system isn't geared towards realism, nor is it perfect balanced, but I think it works pretty well for it's intended purpose (encouraging players to pick interesting weapons that fit their concept).

ziegenpeter wrote:These simulations are cool, I am astonished how good the flail is. maybe I should tone it down a bit (d6-1?)

Hello, I still think your work is pure awesome. I wanted to make it possible to awesome-iefy your armor as well, though, which made me unwilling to use that part of your rules. I don't know if I sould have posted this in a seperate topic, but I've created a bit of a prototype armor maker here that works based on the rules in the Savage Armoury.